What’s your opinion: should remote workers be paid based on where they live or where their employer’s HQ is located?

Building on the last question I posted, should remote workers be paid based on where they live or where the company they work for is located? I’d love to hear your thoughts! Let’s discuss.

Theoretically, we should be fairly compensated based on the average income in our field, I guess. But realistically it’s always going to be based on where you actually live, I’m afraid - no employer is going to pay the same salary to imaginary Joe from New York vs Piotr from Poland or smth. The pay is always adjusted to your location and cost of living. Whether or not that’s fair is a whole different topic.

@VinceParucci - I can definitely understand your points there. It’s tough too because I believe people should be paid for their skills, not where they live. Just because I choose to live in a more affordable area doesn’t mean I should be paid less. Pay should be based on skills imo.

I’ve also found many jobs don’t adjust for a higher cost of living – why should they pay for you to be in an expensive city though? So I do see that. My vote is to stop location based pay and go for skill-based instead.

Thanks for sharing your input!